This forum is where you should post items that contain No Paul Content, or No Beatle Content. Keep it clean. Absolutely no politial discussions are allowed. Posts deemed objectional will be deleted without warning.

Of course you have to have measure to protect the phsyco vengeful mother wrongly acusing her husband just to get more money or get back at him for cheating on her.

Unfortunately, yes. You also have to understand another impact:

Many women are unwilling to turn in their husbands (or the child's grandfather/uncle) for molestation knowing it carries a mandatory 25year charge. They mistakenly think they just want to "put a scare" into the guy- and that once he's caught, they'll get counseling and be a happy family again.

So you have to be careful with mandatory sentencing laws-- because you can actually DETER punishment at an early stage (i.e. at the first indications mom takes action rather than after its obvious the damage has been done).

You also have to realize that 90% of the molestation cases are these family-type situations which are incredibly complicated-- only a small number are the "sicko down the block/billionaire pop star" variety. Any family court judge will tell you that the ONE place judges need discretion is in these family situations.

Everyone's talkin' 'bout the President
We all chip in for a bag of cement

I was only referring to the phsyco women who use the abuse card in divorce proceedings when there is no truth to the allegations. Women who won't turn in their husbands in fear of whatever, well that is a whole different story. Any mother who knows their child is getting raped by a relative, and continues to let it happen, well, I won't say what I think should happen to them.

I beg to differ regarding your last paragraph. I abuse takes place especially with children, then it must be reported, husband, uncle, father, sister, brother, whatever. If they did it to one, they probably have done it to others and will continue unless they are stopped. It is complex but an uncle srewing a 6 year old, what kind of mother would accept that activity? I think the process, the names of the acuser as well as the acused should be kept private, that is the only discretion. Then once convicted the molester loses all privacy rights and the rights of the victim and possible future victims takes priority and all the means to keep this person from harming another child should be taken.

I think the process, the names of the acuser as well as the acused should be kept private, that is the only discretion. Then once convicted the molester loses all privacy rights and the rights of the victim and possible future victims takes priority and all the means to keep this person from harming another child should be taken.

I don't disagree about harsh penalties being needed.

I work in social services and encounter this type of thing in my job-- whenever you get into family issues things get awfully complex-- a battered woman's husband also molests their child, she refuses to leave him, won't report him out of fears for her own safety-- there are not a lot of easy answers in these situations. Which is why I am leary of taking discretion away from family court judges. All of them I have worked with, both known liberal and conservative, are able to use their experience to discern what is going on and make a good judgement.

Everyone's talkin' 'bout the President
We all chip in for a bag of cement

so...i was talking to an old friend the other day...and he's telling me he has this new radio installed in his car...its a'hands-off' new fangled gadget...anyway, if he calls out 'rock': it plays ac/dc or the stones...

if he calls out 'jazz' it plays thelonius monk or frank sinatra...

so...the other day, he's driving down the road, when two teenagers run out from between two cars and he inadvertantly yells "f*!king kids !!"...and the damned thing plays michael jackson...go figure...

at the end of the end it's the start of a journey to a much better place and this wasn't bad so a much better place would have to be special...no need to be sad...

First of all, PLEASE do not refer to that guy as MJ. MJ is a basketball star from chicago and while he is no where near perfect, he should not be confused with micheal jackson.

Second if more than two people have the same story, it is more than just a coincidence. What kind of parent would allow their child to spend the night with a "pop star"? Regardless of who it is. Say Keith richards opens up foreverland ranch, are we as parents going to let our kids go hang with him because he has wealth?

First of all, PLEASE do not refer to that guy as MJ. MJ is a basketball star from chicago and while he is no where near perfect, he should not be confused with micheal jackson.

Second if more than two people have the same story, it is more than just a coincidence. What kind of parent would allow their child to spend the night with a "pop star"? Regardless of who it is. Say Keith richards opens up foreverland ranch, are we as parents going to let our kids go hang with him because he has wealth?

Third,

what's disturbing is people hounding a guy who is obviously extremely mentally disturbed.

And Michael Jackson may be many things, but at least he wasn't in Space Jam

May sweet memories of friends from the pastAlways comes to you, when you look for them